The Lambertville record. [volume] (Lambertville, N.J.) 1872-1968, 1887-10-26

Vice Chancellor Bird Thinks Contracts
Should be Limited for One Year.


Vice Chancellor Bird Thinks Contracts
should be Limited for One Year.
An important opinion was filed in the
Court of Chancery yesterday morning, by
Vice Chancellor Bird, which reveals some
important points for the action of Com
mon Councils. Tho case is Of Taylor and
other citizens of Lambertville, against
the Common Council Of that city, in re-
gard to entering into contract with the
Pennsylvania Globe Gas Light Company
for lighting the city. Iu 1856 the Com
mon Council of Lambertville passed an
ordinance authorizing contract with the
Lambertville Gas Light Company s'sH=s..--'
Dish the city with gas. q n A
eutered intn,--a,.Ss-1ro time to Time new
contracts were made until 1884, when the
last one was made in writing. Still the
company continued to furnish the light
for the city until in the Winter of 1886,
when the company sought to increase the
amount which it was to receive by the
written contract. The increased bill pre-
sented was rejected by Council and was
after wards modified by the company to
conform with the former agreement, and
was ordered to DO paid ut subsequent
meeting Of Council. A resolution was
then passed to advertise for proposals for
lighting the city, and this was done in
several papers. Two offers were sent in,
one by the Pennsylvania Globe Gas Light
Company and one by a New York Gas
Light Company. Ata subsequent meet
ing of Council contract was entered in
to by which 1t was agreed that the former
company would light the city for five
years from February LIST, 1886.
The complainants, who are residents of
Lambertvlle, asked to have the perform.
ance of this contract enjoined They held
that Common Council could not enter in.
TO such contract TO take effect during
the continuance of the one previously
made with the Lambertville Gas Light
Company. The city had not given any
notice to the said company of the termin-
alton of the contract, although the COM
pany had constructed its works and made
ample preparations to furnish the light.
The Vice Chancellor holds that one party
was bound to furnish gas during the en-
tire year after it had once commenced
and the other party having once received,
the gas company was bound to accept tho
pay for it upon the terms of the last con-
tract. AS to the necessity of passing an
ordinance instead of making the change
of contract by a resolution, Vice Chan
cellor Bird thinks thata resolution should
be observed with equal solcitude with an
ordinance. Tbs words Of one are Of no
less import that those of another. He
emphasizes the fact that under the sta
tute, Common Council is bound by its
own resolution; having prescribed the
way in which the work in view shall be
accomplished it cannot depart therefrom
SO long as the way SO prescribed remains
in full force. He thinks that in depart
ing from the details described by this
resolution, and in entering into contract
irrespective of those details. the Common
Council committed an error, and the con
tract is nugatory. He advises the in
function, before granted in preliminary
sense, be made perpetual, with costs.
The Vice Chancellor also holds that mu-
nicipal authorities have not the power to
cover any unlimited or unreasonable DO.
Rod Of time in making such contracts.
The view that one Common Council can
not bind another or impose burdens for
tho future, be thinks is correct ono.
lie thinks The Legislature intended to
limit such contracts to period of one
year.